Carl often hears about, anonymizes, and warns me when technical folks outside the community are offended by something I do. I can’t recall hearing any warnings from Carl about the QM sequence offending technical people.
That sounds like reasonable evidence against the selection effect.
Bluntly, if shminux can’t grasp the technical argument for MWI then I wouldn’t expect him to understand what really high-class technical people might think of it.
I strongly recommend against both the “advises newcomers to skip the QM sequence → can’t grasp technical argument for MWI” and “disagrees with MWI argument → poor technical skill” inferences.
I strongly recommend against both the “advises newcomers to skip the QM sequence → can’t grasp technical argument for MWI”
That inference isn’t made. Eliezer has other information from which to reach that conclusion. In particular, he has several years worth of ranting and sniping from Shminux about his particular pet peeve. Even if you disagree with Eliezer’s conclusion it is not correct to claim that Eliezer is making this particular inference.
and “disagrees with MWI argument → poor technical skill” inferences.
Again, Eliezer has a large body of comments from which to reach the conclusion that Shminux has poor technical skill in the areas necessary for reasoning on that subject. The specific nature of the disagreement would be relevant, for example.
That inference isn’t made. Eliezer has other information from which to reach that conclusion. In particular, he has several years worth of ranting and sniping from Shminux about his particular pet peeve.
That very well could be, in which case my recommendation about that inference does not apply to Eliezer.
I will note that this comment suggests that Eliezer’s model of shminux may be underdeveloped, and that caution in ascribing motives or beliefs to others is often wise.
I will note that this comment suggests that Eliezer’s model of shminux may be underdeveloped
It really doesn’t. At best it suggests Eliezer could have been more careful in word selection regarding Shminux’s particular agenda. ‘About’ rather than ‘with’ would be sufficient.
That sounds like reasonable evidence against the selection effect.
I strongly recommend against both the “advises newcomers to skip the QM sequence → can’t grasp technical argument for MWI” and “disagrees with MWI argument → poor technical skill” inferences.
That inference isn’t made. Eliezer has other information from which to reach that conclusion. In particular, he has several years worth of ranting and sniping from Shminux about his particular pet peeve. Even if you disagree with Eliezer’s conclusion it is not correct to claim that Eliezer is making this particular inference.
Again, Eliezer has a large body of comments from which to reach the conclusion that Shminux has poor technical skill in the areas necessary for reasoning on that subject. The specific nature of the disagreement would be relevant, for example.
That very well could be, in which case my recommendation about that inference does not apply to Eliezer.
I will note that this comment suggests that Eliezer’s model of shminux may be underdeveloped, and that caution in ascribing motives or beliefs to others is often wise.
It really doesn’t. At best it suggests Eliezer could have been more careful in word selection regarding Shminux’s particular agenda. ‘About’ rather than ‘with’ would be sufficient.